10.1007/s40089-015-0146-7

The effect of different parameters on mechanical properties of PA-6/clay nanocomposite through genetic algorithm and response surface methods

HTML PDF
  • M. Moghri*1,
  • H. Shamaee1,
  • H. Shahrajabian2,
  • A. Ghannadzadeh3,
  1. Kashan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kashan, IR
  2. Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, IR
  3. Department of Chemical Engineering, Hamedan University of Technology, Hamedan, IR
Cover Image

Published in Issue 2015-04-25

How to Cite

Moghri, M., Shamaee, H., Shahrajabian, H., & Ghannadzadeh, A. (2015). The effect of different parameters on mechanical properties of PA-6/clay nanocomposite through genetic algorithm and response surface methods. International Nano Letters, 5(3 (September 2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40089-015-0146-7
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

HTML views: 17

PDF views: 103

Abstract

Abstract This paper presents a methodology for determination of the optimal material and processing parameters (i.e., nanoclay content, melt temperature, feeding rate, and screw speed) to maximize simultaneously tensile modulus and tensile strength of injection-molded PA-6/clay nanocomposites through coupling response surface method and genetic algorithm. The tensile tests on PA-6/clay nanocomposites are conducted to obtain tensile modulus and tensile strength values, and then analysis of variance is performed. The predicted models for tensile modulus and tensile strength are created by response surface method, and then the functions are optimized by a genetic algorithm code implemented in MATLAB. Acceptable agreement has been observed between the values of the process parameters predicted by the response surface method and genetic algorithm and those of the process parameters obtained through experimental measurements. This study shows that the response surface method coupled with the GA can be utilized effectively to find the optimum process variables in tensile test of PA-6/NC nanocomposites.

Keywords

  • Optimization,
  • Tensile modulus,
  • Tensile strength,
  • Response surface method,
  • Genetic algorithm
HTML PDF

References

  1. Tien and Wei (2001) High-tensile-property layered silicates/polyurethane nanocomposites by using reactive silicates as pseudo chain extenders (pp. 9045-9052) https://doi.org/10.1021/ma010551p
  2. Brune and Bicerano (2002) Micromechanics of nanocomposites: comparison of tensile and compressive elastic moduli, and prediction of effects of incomplete exfoliation and imperfect alignment on modulus (pp. 369-387) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-3861(01)00543-2
  3. Ji et al. (2002) Tensile modulus of polymer nanocomposites (pp. 983-993) https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.11007
  4. Fornes et al. (2002) Effect of organoclay structure on nylon 6 nanocomposite morphology and properties (pp. 5915-5933) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-3861(02)00400-7
  5. Chavarria et al. (2007) Effect of melt processing conditions on the morphology and properties of nylon 6 nanocomposites (pp. 1847-1864) https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.20894
  6. Garofalo et al. (2009) Modelling of mechanical behaviour of polyamide nanocomposite fibres using a three-phase Halpin-Tsai model (pp. 1-16)
  7. Molajavadi and Garmabi (2011) Predicting the Young’s modulus of intercalated and exfoliated polymer/clay nanocomposites (pp. 1-12)
  8. Liu et al. (2012) Ultrasonic stirring effect on the microstructure of A356 alloys (pp. 120-127)
  9. Nouri et al. (2012) Fabrication and mechanical property prediction of carbon nanotube reinforced Aluminum nanocomposites (pp. 1-14) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2011.07.047
  10. Khuri and Mukhopadhyay (2010) Response surface methodology (pp. 128-149) https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.73
  11. Haupt and Haupt (2004) Wiley
  12. Li et al. (2009) Optimal design of heating channels for rapid heating cycle injection mold based on response surface and genetic algorithm (pp. 4317-4323) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2009.04.016
  13. Kurtaran and Erzurumlu (2006) Efficient warpage optimization of thin shell plastic parts using response surface methodology and genetic algorithm (pp. 468-472) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-004-2321-2
  14. Ozcelik and Erzurumlu (2005) Determination of effecting dimensional parameters on warpage of thin shell plastic parts using integrated response surface method and genetic algorithm (pp. 1085-1094) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2004.10.032
  15. Sun, B., Wu, Z., Gu, B., Huang, X.: Optimization of injection molding process parameters based on response surface methodology and genetic algorithm: ICCET 2010. In: Proceedings 2010 International Conference on Computer Engineering and Technology, vol. 5, pp 5397–5400 (2010)
  16. Chen et al. (2011) Experimental investigation of designed parameters on dimension shrinkage of injection molded thin-wall part by integrated response surface methodology and genetic algorithm: a case study (pp. 534-540) https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2010.530331
  17. Tzeng et al. (2012) A study of optimization of injection molding process parameters for SGF and PTFE reinforced PC composites using neural network and response surface methodology (pp. 691-704) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-012-3933-6
  18. Chen et al. (2012) A two-stage optimization system for the plastic injection molding with multiple performance characteristics (pp. 1220-1223) https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.472-475.1220
  19. Natalini et al. (2013) Comparison of numerical and experimental data in multi-objective optimization of a thermoplastic molded part (pp. 84-106) https://doi.org/10.3139/217.2699
  20. Desai et al. (2008) Comparison of artificial neural network (ANN) and response surface methodology (RSM) in fermentation media optimization: Case study of fermentative production of scleroglucan (pp. 266-273) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2008.05.009
  21. Wang X., Zhang C., Wang K., Li P., Gao Y., Hu Y., et al.: Observation of a new particle in the search for the standard model higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC Zhongguo Jiguang/Chin. J. Lasers 39 (2012)
  22. González et al. (2012) Amorphous polyamide/maleated styrene–ethylene–co-butylene–styrene nanocomposites: effects of clay loading and compatibilizer content on morphology and mechanical properties (pp. 294-300) https://doi.org/10.1038/pj.2011.124
  23. Keramati et al. (2012) Microcellular foaming of PP/EPDM/organoclay nanocomposites: the effect of the distribution of nanoclay on foam morphology (pp. 1-17)
  24. Domenech et al. (2013) The importance of specific mechanical energy during twin screw extrusion of organoclay based polypropylene nanocomposites (pp. 7-14) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2012.11.016
  25. Paggi et al. (2013) Process optimization for PA12/MWCNT nanocomposite manufacturing by selective laser sintering (pp. 1977-1985) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-012-4474-8
  26. Moghri et al. (2013) Effect of nanoclay content on nanoclay dispersion mechanism: diffusion-controlled mechanism versus shear-controlled mechanism (pp. 1956-1965) https://doi.org/10.1177/0731684413493950
  27. Alexandre and Dubois (2000) Polymer-layered silicate nanocomposites: preparation, properties and uses of a new class of materials (pp. 1-63) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-796X(00)00012-7
  28. Cho and Paul (2001) Nylon 6 nanocomposites by melt compounding (pp. 1083-1094) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-3861(00)00380-3
  29. Dennis et al. (2001) Effect of melt processing conditions on the extent of exfoliation in organoclay-based nanocomposites (pp. 9513-9522) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-3861(01)00473-6
  30. Fornes et al. (2001) Nylon 6 nanocomposites: the effect of matrix molecular weight (pp. 09929-09940) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-3861(01)00552-3
  31. Ray and Okamoto (2003) Polymer/layered silicate nanocomposites: a review from
  32. preparation to processing (pp. 1539-1641) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2003.08.002
  33. Chavarria et al. (2007) Effect of melt processing conditions on the morphology and properties of nylon 6 nanocomposites (pp. 1847-1864) https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.20894
  34. Moghri and Garmabi (2008) Investigation of the effects of formulation and processing parameters on properties of PA 6 nanocomposites using Taguchi method of experimental design (pp. 430-438) https://doi.org/10.3139/217.2132
  35. Paul and Robeson (2008) Polymer nanotechnology: nanocomposites (pp. 3187-3204) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2008.04.017
  36. Pavlidou and Papaspyrides (2008) A review on polymer–layered silicate nanocomposites (pp. 1119-1198) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2008.07.008
  37. Huynh et al. (2012) Role of interfacial chemistry on the rheology and thermo-mechanical properties of clay-polymer nanocomposites for building applications (pp. 519-531) https://doi.org/10.2478/s11696-011-0118-y
  38. Kutvonen et al. (2012) Influence of nanoparticle size, loading, and shape on the mechanical properties of polymer nanocomposites https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4767517
  39. Sivanandam and Deepa (2007) Springer
  40. Quinn and Keough (2002) Cambridge University Press https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511806384